Page 9 Agenda Item 5

London Borough of Sutton

Sutton Area Committee - 21 June 2006 Carshalton and Clockhouse Area Committee - 5 July 2006

Report of the Interim Head Transport Planning and Works Team

S4 BUS ROUTE PROPOSED EXTENSION

Ward Location: Sutton Central, Sutton Author(s) and Contact Phone Number(s): North, St. Helier and The Colin Poore 020 8770 6046 Wyrthe Area Served: Sutton, Benhilton and Lead Councillor: Rosehill Councillor Colin Hall

Key Decision Report

Summary The report considers the results of the consultation on the proposal to extend the S4 bus route from Marshall’s Road (Sutton) to St. Helier Station (LB. Merton) via Benhill Avenue, Thicket Road, Oakhill Road, Benhill Road, Grennell Road (for Greenshaw High School), Edinburgh Road, Duke of Edinburgh Road, Whitby Road, Wrythe Lane (for St Helier hospital) and Green Lane. The consultation was undertaken by Transport for London (TfL). It further considers the implications and requirements of providing the extension to the route. Recommendations I recommend the Committee to: a. Agree to the introduction of an extension to the S4 bus route, on the road network indicated in this report. b. Request of TfL that the extension to the S4 bus route is introduced primarily as a ‘Hail and Ride’ service and that the need for permanent bus stops be reviewed at a later date once the service is operational. c. Introduce bus stops with clearways on Thicket Road, adjacent to 1 Lower Road and outside and opposite Oak Lodge, as shown on the attached plans, subject to funding from Transport for London. d. Agree to advertise the appropriate Traffic Order under the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984, for the purpose of amending the parking layout of the Sutton CPZ on Thicket Road, and to delegate authority to the Interim Executive Head of Planning, Transport and Highways, in conjunction with Ward Members to proceed with the Making of the Traffic Order, subject to no material objections being received to the advertised order. e. Agree to the wording of the statement of reasons for the Order to read: - to allow for the introduction of bus stops and the safe and efficient running of bus services.

1 Page 10 f. Subject to the agreement of funding from TfL, amend capital estimates and release financial provision in the sum of £50K 1. Background 1.1 On the 20 April and 4 May 2005 a report was presented to the respective Area Committees of Sutton and Carshalton and Clockhouse. The report considered the proposal to extend the S4 bus route north from Marshall’s Road (Sutton) to St. Helier rail station (LB Merton). 1.2 The committee’s resolved to: - a. Support the proposal to extend the S4 bus route as detailed in the report. b. Subject to funding being made available by Transport for London (TfL), Authorise the Executive Head of Planning, Traffic and Highways: i) to investigate measures required to ensure safe and unobstructed access for the extension to the S4 route. ii) to identify with TfL suitable stopping locations. iii) In conjunction with TfL, to undertake a consultation on the S4 route extension and report the results back to a future committee. iv) to advertise an amended Traffic Management Order to permit buses servicing the route to use the roads as identified in the report. 1.3 There have been longstanding requests for a bus route closer to the vicinity of Thicket Road and Grennell Road in the Benhilton area. Transport for London (TfL) is in receipt of letters and a petition from local people asking for a bus service to these roads. In addition, TfL have also had suggestions from pupils at Greenshaw High School, on Grennell Road, that a bus service should operate from Roundshaw to Carshalton and Greenshaw High School. This confirmed to TfL that a transport case exists for providing this service with the bus route S4. 1.4 The Council for its part, in the past, has received significant correspondence from elderly residents in the Thicket Road area for the introduction of a bus service. These requests were support by the local Member of Parliament. This area is generally quite hilly and it is difficult for the elderly to negotiate especially when having to carry shopping. 1.5 When the Council was initially looking to establish its ‘Hoppa’ bus network, parts of the north Sutton area were identified by officers as being in excess of 400 metres from the nearest bus service. However, at the time it was not possible to establish a route into these areas. 1.6 The extension of the S4 service in the Roundshaw estate, initiated in January 2005, provided the opportunity for TfL to assess the feasibility of providing the requested new bus links to the Benhilton area. 1.7 Route S4 currently operates every 30 minutes on Mondays to Saturdays from around 06:00 to midnight and serves Roundshaw, Woodcote Green, Wallington, Carshalton on the Hill, Carshalton Beeches, Royal Marsden Hospital, Belmont and Sutton. It currently terminates at Sutton town centre, Marshalls Road. 1.8 The recent extension to the route is a result of the re-development of the Roundshaw estate. TfL could only find the additional resources to extend the route on the estate by reducing the bus frequency and as the earlier increase to a 2 Page 11

20 minute service did not justify the level of patronage the 30 minute service was re-introduced. 1.9 The service now runs the full length of Mollison Drive, picking up Wilson’s School, turning via Stafford Road, Redford Avenue and Link Lane in order to re-acquire the route. 1.10 As a result it was found that there is extra surplus time that will enable the route to be extended as outline below. 1.11 The service is designed to serve residential areas, which are heavily populated and often remote from other public transport facilities. It provides important links to shops, public transport and other amenities that would otherwise be difficult to access for people who do not have a car, or for those who prefer not to use a car. The Proposed Route Extension 1.12 It is proposed to extend route S4 from Sutton to St Helier along the following line of route: Benhill Avenue, Thicket Road, Oakhill Road, Benhill Road, Grennell Road (for Greenshaw High School), Edinburgh Road, Duke of Edinburgh Road, Whitby Road, Wrythe Lane (for St Helier hospital) and Green Lane to St Helier Station. The same roads would be served in both directions. 1.13 This route extension would benefit many residents in the Benhilton area, especially those with mobility problems, and also create new direct bus links to local amenities including stations, other bus services, hospitals, employment and shops. 1.14 The extension would also bring Benhilton and part of the St Helier estate new links to the St Helier, Royal Marsden (into the grounds) and Sutton Hospital sites. 2 Issues Bus Access 2.1 The existing S4 route already includes many residential roads, which are heavily parked due to high car ownership. In some places, buses have trouble navigating their way through. Where necessary the Borough has taken measures to alleviate these problems. 2.2 An initial survey using a bus of the relevant dimensions indicates that some of the roads on the proposed extension are also heavily parked. Once the extension to the service is running it may be found that there are sections of the route that gradually become increasingly difficult to negotiate and as a result will need be to be treated in a similar manner. 2.3 In the earlier report it had been stated that a Traffic Management Order for a 7.5 tonne lorry ban, including buses, also exists. This would not have permitted public service vehicles to use the proposed route between Benhill Avenue and Wrythe Lane without an amendment to that order. Further examination of the Order has confirmed that this is not the case and buses are permitted to enter these streets for the purpose of boarding and alighting of passengers. Stopping Arrangements – Serving the Community 2.4 The buses that operate on route S4 are low floor, fitted with kneeling mechanisms and wheelchair ramps. The Mayors Transport Strategy states that low floor buses will not give full value unless they are able to pull up adjacent to a kerb of the

3 Page 12

appropriate height. This has been confirmed by bus operations, which shows that low floor buses need to be able to access the kerb to be used to their full advantage. 2.5 Recent estimates suggest that as many as 22% of the adult population and 16% of working age population have a disability. The Borough and TfL need to work together to remove barriers that make it difficult for people to use public transport, by protecting kerbside access and providing visual indicators that a bus service operates on a road. 2.6 In many roads on the S4 route, bus users on hail and ride sections, either gather in places where there is a gap in car parking (such as dropped kerbs) or they expect the bus to stop in the road, requiring passengers to step out into the road between continuous lines of parked cars in order to board or alight. 2.7 Traffic and parking conditions are variable and sometimes it is not clear where the bus will be able to stop. The driver may also have a different opinion to the passenger about the suitability of a stopping point, based on safety or frequency reasons. Safety of bus and other road users may be compromised at points at which some passengers chose to wait. Journey times for other passengers are affected if the bus stops too frequently. 2.8 It is necessary to ensure that people can access the service in the Benhilton area. It is important that buses can reach the kerb and TfL would like to be in the position to display timetable information, as this encourages use and can reassure passengers that they are waiting in the right place. Timetable information indicates when the bus is due to arrive. 2.9 Suitable stopping locations were identified with London Buses and these were included in the consultation undertaken by TfL. Drawings showing the proposed stop locations are attached to this report. 2.10 In order that stops are fully accessible it will be necessary to ensure that hard standings are provided and that the kerbs are of the appropriate height. It will be necessary to revise the parking layout in Thicket Road with the loss of 6 spaces. The Traffic Management Order relating to Sutton Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ) will require to be amended. Bus stop locations outside of the CPZ will displace the equivalent of approximately 2 vehicles per location. This has the potential of reducing available kerb side parking along the remainder of the route by twenty vehicles. 2.11 The cost of undertaking this work has been estimated at £50,000. The works are to be funded by TfL through the Bus Priority programme. 3. Consultation 3.1 A draft consultation leaflet was prepared by TfL for the consideration of ward members and council officers. The draft was circulated in late December and comments received were passed to TfL in mid January. 3.2 A delay was experienced in getting the leaflet to consultation due to personnel changes at TfL, within the section dealing with this issue. 3.3 Transport for London commenced the consultation on the 13 March, running for a period of 6 weeks, with leaflets being distributed to all properties on the proposed route extension, between Benhill Avenue and Wrythe Lane. Benhill Avenue and Wrythe Lane were omitted as they already have buses routed along them. The

4 Page 13

area of consultation extended approximately 300m either side of the proposed route. Approximately 2800 leaflets were delivered by the post office. 3.4 Transport for London notified the borough that the post office had identified some properties as being undeliverable. Officers of the council were also made aware by some residents that they had not received the leaflet. Where notified, officers of the council undertook to deliver leaflets to these addresses. At the same time additional leaflets were delivered to the addresses where bus stops were proposed to ensure that residents were notified of proposals 3.5 The details of a contact officer at the council were provided on the leaflet with respect to issues regarding the proposed bus stop locations. Eight calls were received in total but there was no one location of particular concern. There were two calls from residents of Duke of Edinburgh Road and Benhill Road and one from residents of Whitby Road, Edinburgh Road, Thicket Road and another who did not specify the road over which they were concerned. Not all callers were against the proposed bus route but were mainly concerned with the location and need for bus stops. All callers were invited to address their formal comments to TfL for consideration. 3.6 Officers also received correspondence direct, which was forwarded to TfL, or were copied into responses sent to TfL. These were as follows: -

Objection

Street Bus Route Bus Stop Reason Edinburgh Road √ √ Noise, pollution, property damage

Edinburgh Road √ Noise, congestion, loss of parking, expense for resident Edinburgh Road √ √ Vehicle damage, litter, pollution, stress Edinburgh Road √ √ Congestion, accidents, de-value property prices, noise, pollution, litter Thicket Road √ √ Noise, number of stops

Thicket Road √ √ Noise, number of stops, adequate existing bus services Thicket Road √ √ Adequate existing bus services, loss of parking, anti social behaviour, congestion

Thicket Road √ √ Adequate existing bus services, number of stops, congestion, pollution, safety, loss of privacy, anti social behaviour. Duke of Edinburgh √ √ Adequate existing bus services, Road congestion, loss of parking, noise

3.7 In addition to the correspondence received a petition was also sent to TfL from residents of Thicket Road. This contained 22 signatures, which represented 9 households. The petition was concerned about the placement of a stop outside number 68 Thicket Road, suggesting that it could be relocated or removed, and safety.

5 Page 14

3.8 The figures available from TfL, at the time of writing this report, show that 420 responses were received to the consultation. Of these 290 (69%) said that they would definitely use the service, 48 (11%) said that they would probably use the service, 12 (3%) were undecided, 16 (4%) said that they probably not use the service and 54 (13%) said that they would definitely not use the service. 3.9 Of the group who would definitely not use the service, 29 travel to Sutton 4 or more times a week. 3.10 This group were also against the implementation of the extension to the service. There were also concerns / objections from the other groups. Six from those that would probably not use the service, 2 from the undecided, 4 from the probably would use the service and 16 from the definitely would use the service group. 3.11 The results of the consultation were being collated by TfL at the time of writing this report and will be made available to Committee as an attachment, as soon as they are to hand. 3.12 Borough Officers have been discussing the position of TfL with respect to the provision of providing bus stops along the proposed route extension. They have requested a briefing note from the Bus Priority Team at TfL with respect to this matter. 3.13 The Bus Priority Team has provided the borough with the following: - TfL does not have a formal policy, however pragmatically we have developed the following guidelines/strategy: 1. No Policy to remove Hail and Ride. 2. The current and future BSA programme will focus on ensuring that bus stops are fully accessible. 3. Hail and Ride can be made fully accessible by ensuring the areas where people wait are kept clear of parked vehicles (for example through waiting and loading restrictions). The kerb heights should be in accordance with TfL guidelines. (Accessible bus stop design guidance Jan 2006 edition) 4. Fixed stops are the ‘norm’ however TfL recognises that hail and ride is often the only solution and will work closely with boroughs to deliver accessible stops which will incorporate sections of Hail and Ride. 4. Recommendations 4.1 In view of the support for the proposed extension to the S4 bus route, it is recommended that the new route be adopted. 4.2 That the concern over bus stop locations be addressed in consultation with TfL. 5. Conclusion 5.1 The consultation shows that there is a high level of demand for the extended service and that this should be implemented at the earliest opportunity. Bus stops should be provided where appropriate (on Thicket Road, adjacent to 1 Lower Road and outside and opposite Oak Lodge, as shown on the attached plans) but elsewhere it should be recommended to TfL that the service run as Hail and Ride.

6 Page 15

6 Financial Implications Group Finance Comments 6.1 The estimates cost of this scheme is £50,000. Once approval to proceed with this scheme has been agreed an application to Transport for London will be made for the funding. Strategic/Corporate Finance Comments 6.2 A nominal sum of £5K is currently held within the Bus Priority Baseline Programme Plan for this scheme. Should approval be granted for the scheme to proceed, up to a further £45K will be added to the programme and this will then be submitted to TfL in order to obtain grant funding. 6.3 Subject to funding approval, amend capital estimates by £50K and release financial provison so that the scheme can proceed. 7 Influence of the Council’s Core Values 7.1 The promotion of reliable bus services and the reduction of dependency on motor vehicles will contribute directly to investing wisely for the future, protecting and developing human and natural resources to ensure a healthy environment for present and future generations. 8. Contribution to the Achievement of the Council’s Policy Aims 8.1 Promoting sustainable modes of transport seeks to achieve environmental sustainability by protecting and improving our environment for now and the future. 9. Background Papers Job file for T7002/S001 – S4 Bus Route

7 Page 16

This page is intentionally left blank